Hmm, So Ford Was Working on the Same Drive System as Tucker

[Tuckerfan1053]

Found an interesting article that dates from 1946 and written by Tucker's biographer on an engineer hired by Ford to design a hydraulic drive system (he even had a working prototype), like Tucker was working on at the same time. Most amazingly, the biographer would have had to have been writing the article at the same time he was working for Tucker, he mentions nothing about it in his biography of Tucker (though the figures he cites are identical). Curiouser and curiouser, said Alice. You can see the article here:
http://usera.imagecave.com/tuckerfan/russell01.jpg
http://usera.imagecave.com/tuckerfan/russell02.jpg
http://usera.imagecave.com/tuckerfan/russell03.jpg
http://usera.imagecave.com/tuckerfan/russell04.jpg

Thoughts?

[Tatra Man]

Hello There in Gallatin TN (my best friend lives there),

This is a fantastic article and historical find!

I believe the connection is less than coincidental. I have numerous original design drawings for a hydraulic drive done by George S. Lawson (the original designer and first Chief Stylist of the Tucker) that are dated in 1945 - before Tucker announced this system or even his automobile! Amazingly, the Lawson design is nearly identical to the one in that 1946 Popular Science piece you found on Mr. Russell!

Lawson was possibly designing his hydraulic drive for the Marshall Company of Detroit, or in the least was inspired by his work with that company. [Some of his drawings say "Marshall", others are signed "Lawson"]. This occured during the time when Lawson was working with Preston Tucker. Lawson started working with Tucker in mid-1944. But as the Tucker Corp. did not exist yet (incorporated July 8, 1946), Lawson agreed to work for 5% of the Tucker Corp. stocks that would eventually be issued. This meant that if Lawson wanted to pay his bills, he had to work for paying jobs and design the Tucker in his spare time. Interestingly, Charles T. Pearson had the exact same 5% agreement with Tucker, which means that he was still technically an independent reporter at the time your Popular Science article was written - even though he was putting a lot of effort into the promotion of the Tucker.

Just think, if the Tucker Corp. had been successful, Lawson and Pearson would have been immensely wealthy with 5% each.

In 1945, Lawson created hydraulic motor designs for both automobiles and boats. I have not found any information on the Marshall Co. yet, except that Lawson testified that they were involved with "government contracts".

The complete similarity between Raymond Russell's design and George Lawson's might suggest that they worked together at the Marshall Company. But who first convinced Tucker to promote this idea, Lawson or Russell? It is interesting to note that Preston Tucker did make a statement that he had seen a motor design by George Lawson. Lawson's hydraulic motor design was the only motor design among his design portfolio (which I have examined twice).

The fact that Charles Pearson wrote an article on this hydraulic drive would also make sense, as Lawson and Pearson worked together on the Tucker promotions (brochures, articles). Lawson could have easily given Pearson the Russell connection if they worked together. And an article touting the success of such a drive appearing at the exact same time as Tucker announced his plan to use a hydraulic drive would be fantastic publicity for Tucker. It would give consumers confidence that the Tucker was legitimate and that he would produce a revolutionary automobile.

Does anyone know if Raymond Russell actually worked for Tucker? A quick glance through my files did not surface that name.

Thanks, Hampton

[Tuckerfan1053]

I snailed a copy of the article to the last address I had for Philip Egan, but haven't heard anything back from him about it. I'd think that he'd have an idea if there was any more to it or not.

[Tatra Man]

Hello,

It is extremely unlikely that Phil Egan would have any idea about this. First of all, according to Phil Egan's book, he did not start working on the Tucker project until March of 1947. What you and I are discussing happened over a year before he started. And a lot happened in 1946.

There would have been only a handful of people working on the Tucker project at the time this article was published in February of 1946. And actually, because of lead times on articles in national publications (usually three months), your Charles Pearson article was likely written and submitted in late 1945.

This means that it was somewhere around eight months between the time this article was written and the Tucker Corporation was formed. And it wasn't until the Tucker Corporation was formed in July of 1946 that there was even an internal engineering department to work on this project. Technically, there were no actual Tucker employees at the time this article was written - but there were men that were publicized as being "associated" with Preston Tucker on the project. George S. Lawson was one of these individuals.

Secondly, the fact that this is an engineering project also makes it unlikely that Phil Egan would be familiar with this project - even if he had been present around that time. Although he was part of the engineering department, he was not an engineer, but a "stylist". There is much confusion as to the difference between the two.

Stylists very rarely have anything to do with the engineering of an automobile. They are strictly concerned with aesthetics. Actual engineers would be concerned with engine development, chassis design, interior dimensions, suspension, wheelbase, etc., etc., etc.. Only after the engineers have established/developed all of these things does the work of a stylist begin. As example, engineering would determine the exact dimension of the chassis, windshield placement, overall length, width, etc. This is called a "package". Then the stylists are given the task of designing the looks of the car around these dimensions - which cannot be altered.

Hope what I have written makes sense.

[Tuckerfan1053]

Well, I'd corresponded a great deal with Egan a few years ago and he was pretty up on the nitty gritty of the engineering of the car and the various folks who worked for the company. In fact, one of the things we exchanged were various incarnations of the hydraulic drive. He may have been hired as a stylist by Tucker, but Egan's no slouch when it comes to engineering issues.

[Tatra Man]

I'm not familiar with Phil Egan's knowledge of engineering. But it was definately not his job description. And it is quite possible that he knew many of the engineers at the Tucker Corp., as he was in the same department.

On page 48 of Phil's book, he discusses the state of the hydraulic drive upon arriving to the plant in March of 1947. "The car's configuration included provisions for the Tucker engine in the rear, but without the vaunted hydraulic pump and hydraulic motors in the wheels so crucial to 'Flowing Power.' At some point between the first of January and [the Lippincott team's] entrance into the project, Preston Tucker learned the facts of physics which ruled out such an idea." So, apparently Phil Egan has no first-hand knowledge of the development of this particular drive, as it was apparently dropped before his arrival.

[Tuckerfan1053]

True, but he could have talked to the various folks involved with the project. Certainly, he had plenty of time to go joy riding with Tremulis (and considering that Tremulis designed the forerunner of the space shuttle at the end of WWII, he probably knew a few things engineering wise).

[Guest]

Like Egan, Tremulis was not directly involved in the development of the car's engineering.

Please forgive my cynicism, but if Egan had plenty of time "joy-riding" with Tremulis as you have proposed, who was busy designing the car? The fact is everyone at the Tucker Corporation was working on the "we needed it last week" schedule. I doubt that either man had time to loaf around the engineering department swapping war stories. But maybe they did.

Anyhow, as far as Alex Tremulis and the Boeing DynaSoar (predecessor to the space shuttle), my understanding Tremulis' job at Wright Patterson AF Base was that of an illustrator and not a designer. In other words, he was merely illustrating the designs of actual engineers. But I need to do some more research on this subject. I hope I will be able to unearth a concrete answer to this issue.

[Tuckerfan1053]

Like Egan, Tremulis was not directly involved in the development of the car's engineering.

Please forgive my cynicism, but if Egan had plenty of time "joy-riding" with Tremulis as you have proposed, who was busy designing the car? The fact is everyone at the Tucker Corporation was working on the "we needed it last week" schedule. I doubt that either man had time to loaf around the engineering department swapping war stories. But maybe they did.

Anyhow, as far as Alex Tremulis and the Boeing DynaSoar (predecessor to the space shuttle), my understanding Tremulis' job at Wright Patterson AF Base was that of an illustrator and not a designer. In other words, he was merely illustrating the designs of actual engineers. But I need to do some more research on this subject. I hope I will be able to unearth a concrete answer to this issue.

Egan describes the joy riding with Tremulis in his book. Tremulis had a car with right hand drive and they used to pull stunts to shock other drivers with it. Egan also states that Tremulis was pivotal in the development of the DynaSoar, which doesn't sound like an illustrator to me. And Egan and I corresponded via snail and email for several months, the man's no slouch, and could easily have figured out a lot of the engineering details of the hydraulic drive from seeing the parts scattered about.

[Guest]

Yes, my apoligies. Phil does mention riding in the RH drive Lincoln on page 54 of his book. The prank ,however, occured only once and involved Budd Steinhilber.

Yes, Phil Egan says that Tremulis designed the DynaSoar because this is what Tremulis told him. I have another source that knew Tremulis equally as has stated that his understanding was that Tremulis was merely the illustrator and not the designer. Again, I do not know the answer to this. But if an answer can be found, I hope to find it.

Again, I cannot speak for Egan's knowledge of engineering. And I have never insinuated that he is a "slouch". However, I do not understand why it is so important to you that Egan be acknowledged as an expert on this matter. Has he claimed to be such? If so, I would love to have access to your correspondences so that I may make comparisons between his recollections and the Tucker Corporation's internal correspondences.

[Tuckerfan1053]

Without Egan's permission I'm afraid I can't release the correspondance in good conscience (however, the moment he passes, I'll forward them on to the Tucker archives). You might try asking the club president if he has contact information for Egan. As for my "insistance" that Egan knows what he's talking about, well, over the years I've had professional dealings with a number of engineers, and I certainly wasn't impressed with their intellectual prowess (if the machinist is smarter than the engineer, you've got a real problem), Egan is by far the sharpest fellow I've had dealings with my life, and I simply can't picture him stating that Tremulis was more than an illustrator, if it wasn't true. No matter how much Egan may have admired him, he's not the kind of fellow to let facts get in the way of the truth.

[Guest]

Hello Again,

If these letters were personally written to you, you can do what you like with them. If you feel better asking his permission about releasing them, then I recommend you do that. What would be your concern for not making them public? If you are certain that they are completely accurate, then what’s the harm? Wouldn’t it be important to share this historical information with other Tucker enthusiasts/historians? That’s what the Tucker Club was established to do.

As far as asking Bill Pommering for Phil Egan’s information, there is no need for me to do this. I have talked with Egan on several occasions over the years and have even been to his house. I am quite familiar with him.

In regards to the Tremulis question: I want to make it perfectly clear that I have never once stated or intentionally insinuated that Egan is lying about this matter. In fact, Egan has nothing to do with this issue. The statement he published in his book is based on his source – Alex Tremulis. Egan would not have any reason to doubt Tremulis’ sincerity on the matter. Thus he simply relayed what Tremulis told him. This is an obvious sequence of events, as Egan himself would not have first-hand knowledge of Tremulis’ career at WPAFB - and therefore could neither verify nor deny such a statement. I don’t know anyone who was there with Tremulis, although I wish I did. However, I have a source that knew Tremulis and has doubts about his statement. Therefore – and as previously stated - I do not have an answer for you on this issue. My source may be mistaken. But he may not be. But I think it is important that you know that some doubt has been raised.

I would very much enjoy continuing our discussions. I think the easiest way to do this is to talk on the phone. Please give me a call at (803) 644-5152. Or I will be glad to call you if you send me your number. Thanks, Hampton

[Tatra Man]

By the way, the previous message was posted my me. Forgot to log in before posting my response.

Thanks.

[Tuckerfan1053]

Actually, Egan could sue the pants off of me if I released those letters without his permission, happens all the time, and while it might not stand up in court, I certainly can't afford the legal fees to settle the matter. Better safe than sorry as they say. If you're as familiar with Egan as you claim, then you should be able to answer the questions you have for yourself. Nor was I trying to state that I thought you were implying that Egan was lying, however, I sincerely doubt that Egan would allow Tremulis to pull the wool over his eyes. If Egan didn't think Tremulis was capable of being the designer of the DynaSoar (and was instead merely an illustrator) he wouldn't have put that in his book. Given how well the man can parse through monumental levels of garbage in just a few seconds, I doubt that Tremulis could have pulled a fast one on him (were Tremulis so inclined to do so) and considering that fairly detailed sites like this one credit Tremulis as the designer (and at one time the craft had Tremulis's name attached to it), I'm gonna have to go with Egan. Heck, even TACA agrees

The Space Shuttle. The "Tremulis Zero Fighter", later renamed "Operation Dyna-Soar" was the first exercise of the current Space Shuttle concept of a vehicle that was launched vertically like a rocket but landed like an airplane. The current shuttle even contains some of Tremulis' original influence in its appearance. This also came out of Tremulis' work for the military in the early 1940's.

So I've got two web sites, including the Club's own, as well as Egan's comments that Tremulis was more than an illustrator, and so far, all you've given me is an unnamed source.

[Tatra Man]

The TACA web site also incorrectly promotes Alex Tremulis as the sole designer of the Tucker ‘48. I was just discussing this oversight with Jay Follis (Jay, I apologize for bringing your name into this). Tremulis was one of several designers on the car. He was not the first Chief Stylist for the Tucker Corporation and therefore did not “set the pace” for the design. This was George S. Lawson. And Tremulis did not finish the design of the car either. The Lippincott team actually did this. However, Tremulis did stay until the end of the Corporation.

Anyhow, the web site needs to be corrected to include both George S. Lawson and the Lippincott team (Madawick, Steinhilber, Bergstrom, Egan, and Viemeister).

I really don’t know how the subject keeps coming back to Phil Egan. I don't consider him the issue. But every time I try to get away from it, you bring him up again. But while we’re discussing him, I think it would be interesting to see if he had any Boeing documentation on Tremulis and the Dyna-Soar project. I did notice that the artwork published in his book came directly from Boeing archives. However, Phil doesn’t state that this is Tremulis’ own artwork. Instead he says the design pictured “evolved directly from designs by Alex Tremulis developed at Wright Field in the mid-1940’s”. Until this point I had always assumed that this the featured artwork was Tremulis. But apparently this is not the case.

Look, I don’t know anything about you. But you also do not know anything about me. I have quite a bit of information I can offer you that you will find very interesting. If you are truly interested in Tucker history, you will give me a call or allow me to call you. If you are merely a hero worshipper, I’m wasting my time. I hope the latter scenario is not the case.

I hope to hear from you. Hampton